This paper focuses on what from a global perspective must be seen
as one of the most significant social movements during the post-war
era: the transnational anti-apartheid movement. This movement lasted
for more than three decades, from late 1950s to 1994, had a presence on
all continents, and can be seen to be part of the construction of a
global political culture during the Cold War. The paper argues that the
history of the anti-apartheid struggle provides an important
historical case for the analysis of present-day global politics –
especially in so far that movement organizations, action forms, and
networks that were formed and developed in the anti-apartheid struggle
are present in the contemporary context of the mobilization of a global
civil society in relation to neoliberal globalization and
supra-national political institutions such as the World Trade
Organization, International Monetary Fund, and World Bank.

According to enthusiasts the concept of global civil society is
spreading rapidly and becoming pivotal to the reconfiguring of the
statist paradigm. However, critics have recently grown more numerous
and outspoken in opposition to the term claiming that it is actually
perpetuating statism by grafting the idea of civil society onto the
global by way of an unhelpful domestic analogy. This paper examines
both claims and assesses what role the concept is playing in
perpetuating/reconfiguring statism. First it summarizes current
criticism by identifying three basic accusations: the ambiguity of the
term, the "domestic fallacy,” and the undemocratic effects of using it.
Second, these criticisms are considered in turn and it is concluded
that all three points relate, ultimately, back to the failure of the
critics themselves and some global civil society theorists to move
beyond a state-centered framework of interpretation. In the final
section it is shown how global civil society discourse is beginning to
move not only the concept of "civil society” away from its
state-centred historical meanings, but also how it is contributing to
changing the content of the concept of "the global.”

Global Civil Society: Royal Road or Slippery Path?Ronaldo Munck

Global civil society has become an important paradigm for
progressive social change at a planetary level. It posits a bold new
ethical project for global democratization. For its critics, though, it
is just the social wing of neoliberal globalization diverting social
movements from their tasks. It is also seen as irredeemably Eurocentric
in its assumptions and orientation. A third option, proposed here, is
to understand global civil society as a complex social and spatial
terrain. By bringing politics back in, a progressive option can be
presented to contest the dominant co-optive or reformist conception of
global civil society.

Gramsci, Hegemony, and Global Civil Society NetworksHagai Katz

This study offers a first empirical test at a truly global level
of two contradictory models of global civil society in the global
governance system that are put forth by neo-Gramscian thought. The
first model posits that global civil society is coopted by hegemonic
capitalist and political elites, and promotes hegemonic interests by
distributing neoliberal values and providing a façade of opposition.
The second model views global civil society as the infrastructure from
which counter-hegemonic resistance, and ultimately a counter-hegemonic
historic bloc will evolve and challenge neoliberal hegemony. The
predictions that these two views make as to the structure of global
civil society networks are tested through network analysis of a matrix
of links between 10,001 international NGOs in a purposive sample of
INGOs extracted from the database of the Union of International
Associations. The findings provide partial support to the predictions
of both models, and lead to the conclusion that at present global civil
society is in a transitional phase, but that the current
infrastructure provided by the global INGOs network is conducive to the
development of a counter-hegemonic historic bloc in the future,
providing the northern bias in network is decreased. Strategic steps
needed to achieve this are presented.

Global Civil Society and the Question of Global CitizenshipChris Armstrong

For many recent commentators, the association of citizenship with
the nation-state is under siege, as transnational and even global forms
of citizenship begin to emerge. The nascent phenomenon of global
citizenship in particular is characterized by three components: the
global discourse on human rights; a global account of citizenly
responsibilities; and finally "global civil society.” This last
component is supposed to give a new global citizenship its "political”
character, and for many represents the most likely vehicle for the
emergence of a global, democratic citizen politics. This paper
critically examines this view, asking whether a global form of
citizenship is indeed emerging, and if so whether "global civil
society” is well-equipped to stand in as its political dimension. The
paper examines two opposed narratives on the potential of global civil
society to form a political arm of global citizenship, before returning
by way of conclusion to the vexed notion of global citizenship itself.

Civil Society on Global Governance:Facing Up to Divergent Analysis, Strategy, and TacticsPatrick Bond

This paper considers three different conceptualizations – three
politico-ideological perspectives within civil society – on global-scale
economics and geopolitics. The standpoints can be termed "Global
justice movements,” "Third World nationalism,” and the
"Post-Washington Consensus.” These three perspectives stand in contrast
to the fusion of neoliberal economics and neoconservative politics that
dominates the contemporary world. The three approaches sometimes
converge, but more often than not they are in conflict; as are the
civil society institutions that cohere to the three different political
ideologies. From the three different analyses flow different
strategies, concrete campaigning tactics, and varying choices of
allies. The World Social Forum provides hints of a potentially unifying
approach within the global justice movements based upon the practical
themes of "decommodification” and "deglobalization” (of capital). It is,
however, only by facing up to the ideological divergences that the
global justice movement can enhance its presence.